Friday, September 26, 2008

The denounciations by the 'secular' brigade of the Nanavati commission report on the Gujarat riots were hardly surprising. Also, it is characteristic of the denouncers to criticize a report that is contrary to their expectations by not presenting any logical, factual or strong arguments backed by solid evidence.

No sooner was the first installment of the report tabled in the state assembly, cries of foul play began to be heard, without even an attempt to read the very same thing they were criticizing. It is all too well for the guardians of 'secularism' and 'minorities' to discredit a judicial commission appointed by the highest court of law in our land without providing any convincing counter argument, but the onus of proof lies entirely on the 'communal' people. While the 'secularists' can show complete lack of respect for the democracy, yet the 'communal' folk must be judged by the 'secular' yardstick. Oh, that's right, we are talking of secularism in India here. My bad.

Here is something else that will follow, 'secular' voices in connivance with other shrill voices launching a sustained attack on the 'communal' forces, demonizing Modi without caring too much for the judicial process or evidences. More myths will be floated and reinforced and fed to the people as complete thruth and the mainstream media will only be eager to oblige. Token muslims will be brought into televison studios to mouth scripts. However, the truth is out and all such attempts at suppressing the facts will only add to the already simmering anger amongst the silent majority and loss of credibility to the 'secular' forces.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

The Nanavati Commission absolved Modi of any wrongdoing in the Godhra incidents. Now for the 'secular' brigade to term it as a assault on the minorities, write angry editorials, hold heated debates, write to the central government, approach the UN and the UNHRC, burn candles etc. etc. Never mind that this was a judicial commission appointed by the Supreme Court and not like the political one, appointed by Laloo no less.

How convenient that the Banerjee committee report was all lapped up because it held Modi guilty, but cry hoarse when the Nanavati commission found no fault in him. Worse yet, it implicated people from the minority community. Oh, that's right, everything in this country has to pass the 'secular' test.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

All along Dr. Singh and his cohorts have been maintaining that the Hyde Act does not apply to the Indo-US nuclear deal. But when the deal actually went for the US senate approval, we have this.

"The Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the Henry J Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, and any other applicable United States law."

"Pursuant to section 103(a)(6) of the Henry J Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, in the event that nuclear transfers to India are suspended or terminated pursuant to title I of such Act, the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or any other United States law, it is the policy of the United States to seek to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment, materials, or technology from other participating governments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group or from any other source."

"nothing in the Agreement shall be construed to supersede the legal requirements of the Henry J Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 or the Atomic Energy Act of 1954." [Emphasis added]

This is hardly what Dr. Singh promised the parliament and the nation. The provisions are contrary to everything that he has been claiming. How is this an acceptance of India's nuclear status? And how does this not compromise our strategic concerns?

Friday, September 12, 2008

Thanks to the numerous cheerleaders of jihad, Islamic bigotry is getting bolder and louder. Stealth jihadists masquerading as 'intellectuals' have so successfully hijacked public discourse in India that the mere utterance of anything related to Hindu is immediately denounced as communal. While Islamic aggression (and now Christian aggression) is cheered on as the voice of the persecuted minority, when there is clearly no evidence supporting this. Take any television debate or editorials, myths are floated freely with no evidence to support such claims and worse yet, they go unchallenged allowing such myths to become accepted for further arguments.

So emboldened are Islamists with this support that any sundry Imam can now issue a fatwa warning muslims against associating with Hindus or Hindu practices. In the latest instance Salim Khan, scriptwriter and one half of the erstwhile Salim-Javed team and also Salman Khan's father, was at the receiving end of one such fatwa. This occured in Mumbai no less, so you can imagine the levels to which Islamic intolerance has reached. And rightly, Salim Khan asked this -

“What is the locus standi of these people? Who are they to question people's religious beliefs? Why don't they issue such a 'fatwa' against terrorists and terrorism, which is un-Islamic? The clerics are talking nonsense,”

But, the Imam was not acting on his own. The Islamists are a highly networked and closely knit community. The Jama Masjid and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board have connections to this incident. One Abdul Rehman Anjaria belonging to both these entities had requested the fatwa. Salim Khan's outburst has little effect on the Imams, in fact they had the temerity to mull over more serious actions. Here is what Anjaria says -

“Depending on what he has said, the community elders may go for stringent action against the Khans, including a social boycott,”

Without support from our media, Islamists would not have been so openly hostile towards the native majority religion. I do not expect any condemnations from our supposed intelligentsia, "concerned citizens" or "civil citizens" who are completely blinded by their sympathy for jihadists.

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Charlatanism has taken over diplomacy. The latest revelations on the Indo-US nuclear deal have made American interests quite clear. It was never about empowering India, as claimed, but hoodwinking India into the non-proliferation regime. The letter released by House Foreign Affairs Committee Howard Berman confirms this. The said letter was written 9 months ago by the state department in response to questions posed by the Congress, yet we were kept in the dark, lest the Americans lost the deal.

It is difficult to understand Dr. Singh's enthusiasm for the deal when it has been blindingly obvious, all along, that there were many questionable aspects of the deal that needed more disscussion, clarifications and re-negotiation. But Dr. Singh's incompetence made him blind to all this. He placed more trust in the Americans than his own countrymen who time and again warned him against the deal.

[...] the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Howard Berman has released State Department's answers to 45 questions on the deal which indicate clearly differing perceptions on key issues between New Delhi and Washington. (Emphasis added)

Any why was the letter kept under wraps for 9 months -

The answers were considered ‘so sensitive, particularly because the debate over the agreement in India could have toppled the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the State Department requested they remain secret even though they were not classified,’ according to Washington Post which quoted a spokesman for Berman as saying he had made the answers public because the US Congress must have ‘relevant information’. (Emphasis added)

And what does it say about India carrying out any testing -

In its responses, the State Department has said that as outlined in the 123 Agreement, should India detonate a nuclear explosive device, the US has the right to cease all nuclear cooperation with it immediately, including the supply of fuel.

It also stipulates that US can request India to return items transferred from it including fresh fuel. In addition, the US has the right to terminate the agreement on one year's written notice. (Emphasis added)

No US consent to India's stockpiling of lifetime fuel reserves for safeguarded power reactors.

US civil nuclear cooperation is explicitly conditioned to India not testing ever again.

The US has retained the right to suspend or terminate supplies at its own discretion.

The letter makes clear that the 123 Agreement has granted India no right to take corrective measures in case of any fuel-supply disruption.

The Bush administration's letter states that the 123 Agreement fully conforms to the Hyde Act provisions.

The letter assures Congress that the 'US government will not assist India in the design, construction or operation of sensitive nuclear technologies.

Spin doctors and media agents did not tire telling us how good the deal was and how good the PM was for negotiating it. The prime minister, Sonia, Rahul Gandhi, Pranab Mukerjee, Kapil Sibal etc. asked all opponents to listen to our hearts. Apparently it was in our national interest and that the future generations would thank us for the deal. However, Dr. Singh has a lot to answer to the nation, after all this amounts to him lying on the floor of our parliament and to the nation.

"This letter contains no new conditions and there is no data in this letter which has not already been shared in an open and transparent way with members of the Congress and with the Government of India," US Ambassador David C Mulford said in a statement.

Dr. Singh stands completely exposed and cannot feign ignorance after this. He is now a confirmed liar.